Hostname: page-component-76d6cb85b7-8p85h Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2026-07-17T18:43:42.636Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

From weird-ness to wild-ness: Wordplay and worldviews in the social sciences

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  03 July 2026

Nandita Chaudhary Open the ORCID record for Nandita Chaudhary [Opens in a new window]  and
Mila Tuli Open the ORCID record for Mila Tuli [Opens in a new window]
Nandita Chaudhary*
Affiliation:
Federal University of Bahia: Universidade Federal da Bahia, Brazil nandita.chaudhary@gmail.com
Mila Tuli
Affiliation:
University of Delhi, India mila.tuli@ihe.du.ac.in
*
*Corresponding author.
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

This commentary explores the shift from WEIRD to WILD psychologies, showing how a focus on cultural diversity and meaning-making aligns with this movement. Using examples, we argue that the epistemic recognition of Global South realities is an urgent act of justice – one that frees psychology from its colonial imagination and opens space for many ways of knowing, caring, and becoming human.

Information

Type
Open Peer Commentary
Information
Behavioral and Brain Sciences , Volume 49 , 2026 , e264
Check for updates
Copyright
© The Author(s), 2026. Published by Cambridge University Press

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

Article purchase

Temporarily unavailable

References

Brooks, D. (2020). The nuclear family was a mistake. The Atlantic, March 2020. https://www.theatlantic.com/magazine/archive/2020/03/the-nuclear-family-was-a-mistake/605536/.Google Scholar
Chaudhary, N., Tuli, M., & Pillai, P. (2025). Peripheral lives, central meanings: How the global south can participate in reimagining psychology for the future. Online Readings in Psychology and Culture, 6(3). https://doi.org/10.9707/2307-0919.1212.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Funk, L., Scheidecker, G., Chapin, B. L., Schmidt, W. J., Ouardani, C. E., & Chaudhary, N. (2023). Feeding, bonding, and the formation of social relationships: Ethnographic challenges to attachment theory and early childhood interventions. Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Henrich, J., Heine, S. J., & Norenzayan, A. (2010). The weirdest people in the world?. Behavioral and Brain Sciences, 33(2–3), 61–83. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0140525X0999152X.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Keller, H., & Chaudhary, N. (2017). Is the mother essential for attachment? Models of care in different cultures. In Keller, H., & Bard, K. A. (Eds.), The cultural nature of attachment: Contextualizing relationships and development (Vol. 22, pp. 109–138). Strüngmann Forum Reports. MIT Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Naidu, T. (2021). Says who? Northern ventriloquism, or epistemic disobedience in global health scholarship. The Lancet Global Health, 9(9), e1332–e1335. https://doi.org/10.1016/S2214-109X(21)00198-4.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Newson, M., Buhrmester, M., Xygalatas, D., & Whitehouse, H. (2020). Go WILD, not WEIRD. Journal for the Cognitive Science of Religion, 6(1–2), 80–106.Google Scholar
Santos, B. D. S. (2014). Epistemologies of the South: Justice against epistemicide. (1st ed.) Routledge. https://doi.org/10.4324/9781315634876 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Tomasello, M. (2019). Becoming human: A theory of ontogeny. The Belknap Press of Harvard University.Google Scholar
Tuli, M. (2025). Ethics and practice in the human sciences: A view from developmental psychology. In Tuli, M., & Negi, B. (Eds.), Ethical considerations for research and practice in the human sciences (pp. 33–52). Information Age Publishing.Google Scholar
Tuli, M., & Chaudhary, N. (2025). Reframing developmental psychology: Perspectives from the global south. Emerald Publishing. ISBN 9781805920830.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Valsiner, J. (2021). The future of cultural psychology: An interview with Jaan Valsiner. Europe’s Journal of Psychology, 17(3), 257–268. https://doi.org/10.5964/ejop.7575.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed